About diabetic friendly supplemental drinks

On May 16, 6:49*pm, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 21:00:31 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger

wrote:
Dogman wrote:

Yes, it virtually does. He implies that doing drugs intraveneously,
abusing other rec. drugs, taking antibiotics prohylatically, getting
STD after STD, inhaling amyl nitrates, exchanging bodily fluids with
hundreds of men per month, getting no sleep, eating poorly, drinking
dirty water, etc. will destroy your immune ststem. HIV isn't needed.

To disprove this theory what it takes is for a person who is otherwise
healthy but has suffered an injury to receive a transfusion of HIV
infected blood, then recover from their injuries and be healthy again
and then later become symptomatic and die of AIDS.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, why does he need to have suffered an
injury?

Gee, I could understand his point. What's your problem?
Doug is giving you the classic example of people who
have contracted AIDS through blood transfusions following
being seriously injured. There were plenty of them. They
showed up in the 80s exactly as you would expect with
a virus that is transmitted via blood. Someone was in a
car crash, got a blood transfusion, recovered fine, later
wound up with AIDS.
I gave you Arthur Ashe
as one famous example, though it wasn't an injury, it
was a heart bypass. He was otherwise healthy. And we
know that heart bypass patients normally don't wind up with no
T cells, no immunity and die from AIDS. Only those that
receive blood contaminated with HIV. And as quickly as
these cases appeared, they disappeared here in
the west once blood was screened for HIV. Now that
would be one hell of a coincidence if HIV was not
the cause. Isaac Asimov is another example contracted
through a blood transfusion.

The hemophiliacs are another classic example. They
receive clotting factor that's generated from the blood
on many people. So many of them suddenly started
developing AIDS in the 80s when AIDS first appeared.
Exactly as a reasonable person would expect from a
virus transmitted via blood. Even Montagnier brought
up this proof in the lecture I provided you with a link to.
A lecture where he clearly says Duesburg is wrong
in denying that HIV causes AIDS.

But Duesburg and the denialist ignore these elephants
in the room and come up with all kinds of bizarre explanations
instead. You'd have to believe 10 year old hemophiliacs
were drug abusing homosexuals who didn't get enough
sleep or some other nonsense. That's why Duesburg
hasn't been taken seriously by real scientists for
decades.




Experiments on both monkeys and chimps (our closest cousins) have done
pretty much what you describe above, and they didn't get AIDS.

Which once again shows that you don't know what your
talking about. Monkeys have a very similar disease caused
by a retrovirus. Much research has been done with
monkeys to learn how to combat the human form

http://jvi.asm.org/content/78/4/2121.full

"Newborn rhesus macaques were infected with two chimeric simian-human
immunodeficiency virus (SHIV) strains which contain unique human
immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) env genes and exhibit distinct
phenotypes. Infection with either the CCR5-specific SHIVSF162P3 or the
CXCR4-utilizing SHIVSF33A resulted in clinical manifestations
consistent with simian AIDS. Most prominent in this study was the
detection of severe thymic involution in all SHIVSF33A-infected
infants, which is very similar to HIV-1-induced thymic dysfunction in
children who exhibit a rapid pattern of disease progression."

It's well known that monkeys have a similar retrovirus and a
similar disease that can be transmitted among them. In fact
it's thought that HIV likely came to humans by jumping from
species to species. But all that is real science.



And a doctor in Florida injected himself with HIV and didn't get AIDS.
He did die within a year, I think, from a heart attack.

Sure, we're to believe his self-reported claim that he
actually did that. And even if it was true, it proves nothing.
He died of a heart attack in a year and AIDS can take
many years to manifest itself following infection.


I'm surprised
the AIDS industry didn't start to blame heart attacks on HIV too. They
probably would have gotten away with it.

There have been a
few famous examples like this. They are extremely convincing examples.
Convincing enough that Deusenberg's work on the topic is discreditted
by most scientists.

Like James and Trader, most scientists haven't read Duesberg's book.


That's because among the rational, Duesburg has so thoroughly
discredited himself that he's a joke.



But thousands of them have, and thousands of them agree with Duesberg,
Rasnick, Mullis, et al.


I doubt it's thousands of scientists that have specific knowledge
and are involved with AIDS research and treatment. There will
always be some fools that will believe anything, no matter how
silly. I can show you scientists and engineers who believe
that what the rest of us know were 767's hitting the world trade
center were actually just laser holograms.

Let's see now. We have:

HIV doesn't cause AIDS
HPV isn't a cause of ovarian cancer
No virus can cause cancer.
Monkeys don't get AIDS.

#2 is my favorite. There is a whole branch of
biology devoted to oncoviruses.

What do you want to add to the list next?

On May 16, 2:14*pm, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 10:52:58 -0700 (PDT), "





wrote:
On May 16, 1:13 pm, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 09:54:52 -0700 (PDT), "

wrote:
Montagnier's own words, *2009*:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQoNW7lOnT4&NR=1

Of course the obvious problem for you is that the
video doesn't show Montagnier denying that
HIV causes AIDS.

He said that it is not required,

He never said any such thing.

What part of "HIV is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause AIDS"
do you not understand?

[...]

Look, you claimed "he never said any such thing." Well, he did, and I
gave you the citation. Never means never, eh?

No, you claimed he said it in the contemporary video
that you linked to.
In fact that quote is apparently two decades old.
Rather odd that if Montagnier doesn't believe HIV
causes AIDS that in the recent video he talks about
vaccines, reducing transmission rates, etc. Why
reduce transmission rates if there is nothing to
transmit, eh?



This is what I mean when I say you're too stupid to understand any of
this stuff.

Now please stop? *Okay? *You're boring me to death.

--
Dogman

Sure, you claim:

HIV doesn't cause AIDS
HPV isn't a cause of ovarian cancer
No virus can cause cancer
Monkey don't get AIDS.

#3 is my favorite. There is a whole branch
of biology devoted to oncoviruses.

And you call others here stupid?

On 16/05/2012 9:21 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 20:47:01 -0300, James Warren
wrote:

[...]
Why are you evading a yes or no question?

Why aren't you reading Duesberg's book?

I have a whole stack of unread books that are way more important than that.

I have a feeling that all the books in your home are unread.

You would be wrong yet again. Why do you claim things for which you can't
possibly have any evidence? Do you just insult gratuitously?


--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman

On 16/05/2012 9:22 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 20:55:16 -0300, James Warren
wrote:

[...]
His viewpoint IS an opposing viewpoint, James.

But whose viewpoint is opposing him? Who shall I read for that?

Damn, and I thought a box of rocks was dumb.

Sigh.

Sigh and recommend just one book. You can do that, right?

BTDT.

It should be easy then, so why the dodge?


--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman

On 16/05/2012 11:06 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 22:52:04 -0300, James Warren
wrote:

[...]

I have a feeling that all the books in your home are unread.

You would be wrong yet again. Why do you claim things for which you can't
possibly have any evidence?

Because I can.

I can too, but I have intellectual integrity, so I don't.


Do you just insult gratuitously?

No. Sometimes I get paid to do it.

Bu Duesberg?


--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman

On 16/05/2012 11:07 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 22:52:40 -0300, James Warren
wrote:


Sigh and recommend just one book. You can do that, right?

BTDT.

It should be easy then, so why the dodge?

It's not a dodge, but, as usual, you can't figure out what it is.

Yet another dodge.


--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman

On 16/05/2012 11:36 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 23:16:37 -0300, James Warren
wrote:


You would be wrong yet again. Why do you claim things for which you can't
possibly have any evidence?

Because I can.

I can too, but I have intellectual integrity, so I don't.

You are to intellectual integrity what a fish is to a bicycle.

Yet another claim without any supporting evidence. At least you're consistent.


Do you just insult gratuitously?

No. Sometimes I get paid to do it.

Bu Duesberg?

No, I do it gratis for Duesberg.

So you're an ass kissing disciple then?



--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman

On 16/05/2012 11:36 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 23:17:07 -0300, James Warren
wrote:


It's not a dodge, but, as usual, you can't figure out what it is.

Yet another dodge.

Yet another innane comment.

And another dodge.




--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman

On 16/05/2012 11:39 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 23:37:55 -0300, James Warren
wrote:


You are to intellectual integrity what a fish is to a bicycle.

Yet another claim without any supporting evidence. At least you're consistent.

The proof is all around you.

That's what the theists all say.


No, I do it gratis for Duesberg.

So you're an ass kissing disciple then?

No, I just respect real scientists.

Defined as the ones you believe in, right?

Why don't you read a book on the other side. Compare and contrast opposing
arguments. Critically evaluate both arguments. That's what real scientists do.


--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman

On 17/05/2012 12:01 AM, Dogman wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 23:44:21 -0300, James Warren
wrote:


The proof is all around you.

That's what the theists all say.

That's what anyone who can read says.

No, I just respect real scientists.

Defined as the ones you believe in, right?

No, defined as the ones who practice The Scientific Method.

Why don't you read a book on the other side.

BTDT.

The literature is awash with them.

Compare and contrast opposing
arguments. Critically evaluate both arguments. That's what real scientists do.

Don't tell me what to do. You're not smart enough to do that.

I guess you have to do that when your mind is made up. Everybody else just
must be beneath you. You're not lacking in self esteem, are you?


--
Dogman

"I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty
about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman